I don't really see a triangle. I guess you're talking about the thing that's coming out of the ship and has an alien at the top. I thought the guy
said it was a "nice little blow up" of what is inside the ship.

As far as what it depicts, some crappily drawn spaceships doing crap around a circle.

Uhuh... Serious now, are you trolling?
Here, that's the picture I have been talking about this whole time:

And here's a clearer version:

See? No blow up of anything. It's really not very hard to get, being drawn all crappy and everything.
One circle is the sun, all flashy and spiky with what looks like a solar flare with a spaceship inside it. The other circle is earth, which you can
gather from it having an atmospheric layer around it. And look, the sun has a big black smudge on it. That black smudge? Well, it looks pretty
triangular to me. How about you?

But that tablet you showed me still looks like it was drawn by the same crappy 7 year old.

edit on 5-8-2012 by Mr Headshot because: (no reason
given)

That is not the point!
You still fail to answer the question I put forth to you. Why? Because you cannot explain why the crappy drawing on an ancient (or in your belief not
so ancient) artifact clearly shows something that has been a confirmed phenomenon that only happened a couple of month ago, and even if it's a fake
(which I doubt) predates that very event.

It could have been made last week. Nassim isn't exactly credible. In fact, once I realized that this was him, it's indeed laughable that you put so
much stock into it.

This doesn't "clearly show" anything at all. There's a circle with a smudge, it could easily be a representation of Kirlian photography and a
circular, instead of ovular, finger. Who knows? It's complete bunk, whatever it is.

This isn't the Mexican Government, it's a whack job who wants money from idiots who believe what he says. He's no better than David Wilcock or Richard
Hoagland.

This isn't credible in any way, and it has no support from the archaeological or any other scientific community.

I don't have to justify my disbelief, the burden of proof is on you. Saying "THERE'S A BLACK TRIANGLE THING IN THE MIDDLE OF A CIRCLE THING WITH STUFF
COMING OUT OF IT AND UFOS ALL OVER IT MUST BE LEGITIMATE!!!!" doesn't prove anything.

You assume too much. You can't assume that a circle in a circle represents a planet with an atmosphere, much less, the Earth. And you can't assume
that a circle with squiggly lines around it is the sun.

Your logic is poor, your argument is flawed at best and intentionally lazy and willfully ignorant at worst.

Also, you fail to answer the original question I put forth to you, why is a triangle automatically a stargate?

Yes it is. Or better it was. It's like asking: Where's that bunny cloud you wanted to show me five minutes ago? Thanks for providing these
pictures. The middle one in the top row looks even more like the depiction. Or more like the sun spot on the artifact is a mix of that one and the
infamous triangle.

Btw, anyone know what that black spot on the right in third pic top row is?

Except it wasn't, and that's (almost) the whole point. While it would have made my job more difficult to maintain my position, I would still have
linked the two images, even if that lecture would have been shown only yesterday. But it wasn't, it predates the March 12/2012 sun spot.

You can't assume that a circle in a circle represents a planet with an atmosphere, much less, the Earth. And you can't assume that a circle
with squiggly lines around it is the sun.

Sure I can. It is fairly obvious what the drawing is showing, not even though, but because it is rather crude.

Your logic is poor, your argument is flawed at best and intentionally lazy and willfully ignorant at worst.

You are the one being willfully ignorant. The crudeness of the depiction makes it very easy to understand what is shown. Okay, then don't give me
your interpretation of what's shown, fine. At this point it doesn't matter anymore anyway.

Also, you fail to answer the original question I put forth to you, why is a triangle automatically a stargate?

And here comes my poor logic and flawed argument yet again:
Because I have the audacity to synchronistically link the depiction on the artifact and the triangular sun spot from March 12/2012. And since I
experience multilayered synchronicities almost on a daily basis, I kind of learned to trust my intuition on things like this.
And just as you don't want to justify your disbelief, I cannot lift your burden of proof for you. That's right, the burden of proof may lie on me,
but it is you who is burdened by the need of proof for something that is blatantly obvious for anyone who can connect the dots and sees the bigger
picture.

And even though the drawing is crude, the spaceship does look like it's flying out of the triangular sun spot, at least to me. Then I remembered
where I saw this sun spot before and linked it to the one from March 12/2012 - hence Star Gate. Plus I remember reading somewhere that suns are used
as star gates. Well, the very name Star Gate is a dead give away, if you ask me...

I'm not alone with this interpretation as can be seen from the comparison I posted. I didn't even need to do it myself, as someone had already
beaten me to the punch.

Ok, so, if this space ship is flying from the sunspot why wouldn't it just be easy to assume that the sunspot is a city that just popped up, or is
invisible most of the time?

It's not obvious at all what it's depicting. The crudeness of the art makes it easy to interpret whatever you want.

Intuition, yes this is totally a synonym for science.

It's not that I don't "want" to justify my disbelief. Saying it that way makes it sound like I'm afraid to try. It's that I have no reason to. I
have seen, quite literally, nothing convincing about anything in this thread. The fact that Nassim has his hands in it leads me to put this whole
thing to bed, entirely. It's just stupid.

Ok, so, if this space ship is flying from the sunspot why wouldn't it just be easy to assume that the sunspot is a city that just popped up, or is
invisible most of the time?
It's not obvious at all what it's depicting. The crudeness of the art makes it easy to interpret whatever you want.

Great Scot! A city on the surface of the sun?
Now that would easily be as remarkable as a stargate

Seriously though, I agree with you on that it could be interpreted differently. If it weren't for the phenomenon from March 12 I would agree with you
about the general possibility. Even though it still looks very much like the sun, so I would have interpreted it as the sun anyway.

Intuition, yes this is totally a synonym for science.

Yes, a "science" you lack understanding of ...for now.
That is about to change in a major way though.
For all of us.
Can't wait.

It's not that I don't "want" to justify my disbelief. Saying it that way makes it sound like I'm afraid to try. It's that I have no reason
to.

Don't worry, I understood that you just weren't interested in justifying yourself.
However, I never asked you to justify yourself. All I asked was your interpretation, that's all.
...And you finally gave it to me. A city eh? Well, why not. As good as anything, I guess.

This video is different from the one i seen earlier this year, but the presentation provided is the same. i am wondering, does any know where the
entire video is? I would like to see the full presentation.

Really neat thread. In the video it looks like the advanced lifeforms pushed away a comet or destroyed it to save the earth. I see similar
traditions by the people of India where they put a spot on their foreheads and some traditionally trying to elongate their skulls. Some ancient
Celtic money also has pictures of flat headed rulers. I can't tell for sure what all these things mean but I like to have an open mind about things.
I need to stock up some more coffee if we are going to have Aliens stopping by in the near future.

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.